User talk:Shshshsh/Archive 18

But what about the sourcing of her brothers' information? That information needs sourcing. Moreover, regarding the awards sourcing, additional size that goes into reference does not matter. Readable text size remains same. The article is on the brink of FA-hood. So, as needed, modifications must be done.

To be truthful, despite being a prolific and great creator of articles, you are not good at handling FACs. You commented "I thought there was no need to add that Sangharsh was based on The Silence of the Lambs, but if you already added that - it's fine." Of course you may think so. But when asked in a FAC, either you have to provide the reference, or, you have to make the reviewer agree with your view (which is much more difficult).

Sorry for being harsh, but that's the truth. I have not gone through all the remaining oppose points of Giro. I shall try to address as many as possible. The article is very near there. It's time to "swallow your pride" and do the needful (that phrase within quotation comes from a Surgery text book which used the phrase to describe when a surgeon should stop and revise his decision, however famous that surgeon be). Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 07:50, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the sentence on brothers, have found a source from Washington Post and added that. Unfortunately, the article is not available free. It needs purchase/registration. However, a copy of the article is available here.--Dwaipayan (talk) 10:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can you make a note to use a big green tick on sections of Giros opposes when they have been done. I find his comments extremely difficult to read and it is difficult to see progress is being made. Could you please add a tick to his points that have been addressed so we know what is left to do. Thanks

No,

List of Preity Zinta's awards and nominations is not considered a part of Preity Zinta article. That's an independent article which the reader may or may not chose to read while/after reading Preity Zinta

. That article may be considered as a "daughter" article or "supporting" article. Having a daughter article is not a must for an FA, neither it precludes the main article have references. And, internal wiki referencing is not considered as reliable sourcing (eg - "<ref>See [[List of Preity Zinta's Awards and Nominations]].</ref>" will not do).

Regarding Jolie article, if you are not satisfied with the sourcing of that article, take it to

FAR

. While Jolie article may act as a model, it is not ideal. rather, the goal with Zinta article is to improve even more.

Having references for the awards, does it hurt you (or me, or anybody else)? No. Does it help the article inch towards FA-hood? Yes. So, the references are needed.

Regarding reviewers agree, you have the full right to disagree. But the FAC procedure is basically an agreement procedure in which the community (multiple reviewers) agree that yes, the article is adequate to be an FA. So, despite being irritated and stressed by any and every minor points being discussed in the FAC, the FAC nominator (or, the team) has to work towards the agreement of the community. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:00, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to have done the undo. I did it because it's the easiest mode, otherwise it would take more time to reinsert the refs.

And before jumping to any conclusion, just answer this question. Having those references, does it hurt you (or anyone else)? Or, does it cost the article anything? Or, does it do a damage to the article? If yes, how?--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And indeed, since most of the awards and noms can be sourced to the indiafm list, then please do that. You tell that you can do that, so why don't do that? It's not going to damage the article, rather, do good.

And regarding Giro's oppose, even Tony withdrew his oppose. The article is very much near there....--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jolie, Davis or Leigh, whatever article it is, our aim with Zinta is to surpass those in quality (and not only to emulate those). Definitely their not having sources falls below the wikipedia standard (or, at least, wikipedia policies/guidelines). So, we can add "citation needed" tags, and if still they remain unsourced, we can take them to FAR. It's not by reducing your own standard that you can equate the injustice, rather, making superior examples by yourself you can make those people see their own faults. Indeed I just added a "citation lacking" message in the awards section of teh Jolie article. Let's see what is the reaction.

"There are Wiki links, there is a daughter article, yet it's considered to be false because there is no source." Let's suppose a person who knows nothing about the workings of wikipedia one day stumbles on the Preity Zinta articles, and the person reads the awards section. He wonders, are all these true? How can he be sure that these are true? By two ways, either by clicking the daughter articles, or, by checking the inline citations here in this Zinta article. If we keep both ways open, it would be helpful. Moreover, this Zinta article itself would then act as a model for other similar articles, not the Jolie or others (which are qualitatively inferior).

I know the pain when teh result of a painstaking effort is seen to be kind of raped by others, for trivial issues. But that's the world, unfortunately. And of course, the BOI thing, no one can adequately express the gratitude to you and Relata, really.--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:59, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have placed citation lacking messages in the awards section of all the three articles you mentioned. Let's see... They are not a perfect model for us, we've to surpass them in quality...and with your prolific edits, you can.... Kudos...--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:04, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am always in favour of breaking a larger sentence into two (or more) simpler ones (although I myself cannot do it always due to lack in confidence in sentence construction). And in this instance, the breaking is really good, and easily graspable. Please go ahead and make the change. Reagrds.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree in this..

"Following her portrayal of a range of characters in Kya Kehna, Sangharsh and Chori Chori Chupke Chupke, Zinta was often recognised for her versatility as an actress. Critics attributed her roles in these films as to establishing a new image for leading actresses in Bollywood". That would look just right I think. Best regards

Yeah, often is fine. And removing "widely" is very good (it's too subjective). This version by Blofeld is nice.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday there was a two page spread on Shania Twain in the newspaper about her split from Mutt Lange. It had some revelations and that that she is very insecure with her looks and sometimes feels ashamed of fame and said that she couldn't look people in the eye for many years in case they recognized her. It made me feel even more fond of her knowing her feelings. Beautiful in every way. I could have sworn the newspaper used the quotes from the wikipedia article "When I began singing I wanted to be a backing singer for Dolly Parton or Stevie Wonder,[13] I didn't sign up to be a model or actress and didn't want fame," she has said. "For me it's all about music. Music is when I feel at my best, spiritually, emotionally and physically" This was in the newspaper article exactly. Have a guess how much her and Mutt Lange are worth?

Shahid please be honest , what do you think of the new map and infoboxes to articles like

IMO, "In addition to movie acting, Zinta has written a series of popular columns for BBC News Online South Asia, is a regular stage performer, and along with boyfriend Ness Wadia she is a co-owner of the Indian Premier League cricket team Kings XI Punjab." is fine.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Optimist's Star For not quitting even when it would have been easier to. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 03:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC), and endorsed by Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was a bit surprised to find that Raul had closed the FAC while I was literally in the middle of some comments, but so be it, I suppose. As a good faith effort, I'd be ever so grateful if you could finish addressing the remaining points that were not struck out. Many thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 03:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!!! - KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 (talk) 05:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Most Resilient Editor on Wikipedia Barnstar
		CONGRATULATIONS!! To Mr. Shahid, owner of the biggest pair of Cajones on wikipedia Never letting months of blood, sweat and tears and hell put a stop to his truly unbelievable determination to succeed. I hereby award you this Tireless Contributor Barnstar to congratulate you for achieving your first much deserved FA article. May this article be a model for other articles on Indian actors and actresses to follow and may this have provided you with much experience in the knowledge of what is required for future FA's. I wish you all the very best and it is brilliant how you stuck in there when most editors would have given up. It shows a great strength of character. Have some time to celebrate but please let me join in with you!!! $1,000,000? 10:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply ]

Much deserved! Check your email

]

		The Indian Cinema Barnstar
		A Bollywood barnstar for Shahid's brilliant work on the Preity Zinta and other articles. Finally, after such a long time, Zinta article has achieved the FA status, thanks to unputdownable Shahid.Congrats! --Dwaipayan (talk) 12:26, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply ]

Blofeld has said the rest. Great work, hope to see more and more now...--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:26, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!!! This story has ended in a truly Bollywood style! Now all we need is some dancing! :) Gizza^{Discuss ©} 13:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great work, Shahid! John Carter (talk) 15:11, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, what is the wish now? Any other actor?--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kareena kapoor article seems to be in a good stage. Shilpa Shetty was also seeming good when I last checked.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

		The Half Barnstar
		Presenting you with one half of the great barnstar of collaboration for the Preity Zinta article. The other half goes to Dwaipayan. Aditya(talk • contribs) 15:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC) and fully endorsed by Mspraveen (talk) 16:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Bachchan-saab may be a tough nut to crack, but I would love to take part in a collaboration around the B. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 15:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My hat's off for your patience in securing the Zinta FA-hood! This round of beer is from me! Cheers! Mspraveen (talk) 16:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more than a bit stunned by some of your language, like being a "reference point for all aspiring Wikipedians", and am rather surprised to think anyone thinks of me in such terms, but you have my profoundest thanks. I am going to honestly try to do what I can to measure up to such compliments. John Carter (talk) 15:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tough question. Maybe "After earning degrees in English honors and criminal psychology, Zinta ..." might be enough here. English honors is probably relevant to an actress and thus merits attention, and criminal psychology is the employment field she seemed to be interested in, so it should be mentioned as well. And thanks again. John Carter (talk) 15:45, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Shahid, I don't think you are a moron.. LOL. Over the past month or so, I just felt that as if you didn't want to talk with me anymore. That is why, I never tried to bother you!! Anyways, kindly accept this barnstar as you truly deserve it.

		The Special Barnstar
		I hereby award Shahid, one of the most helpful and kindest Wikipedian, this Special Barnstar for his continious and amazing work on Wikipedia, particularly for his tireless involvement and dedication on Preity Zinta's article; the article truly deserves to be at the spot it is today. Keep up the good work my friend!! Regards, Bollywood Dreamz Talk 16:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The WikiProject Films Award
		I, A thoroughly deserved achievemnet for you know what. Keep going Buddy! WikiProject Films.[reply ] Awarded 28 May, 2008

Congratulations Shahid! I just found out about the Preity Zinta article! Well done mate, I hope you add this to your already long list:

The Bollywood barnstar awarded to Shahid, for his awesome contribution to the Preity Zinta article as well as Indian cinema. This is also for basically hanging in there despite all the obstacles. Keep at it! Pa7 17:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In continuation of our last conversation, Im in exam mode for now. So I'll probably be done by July-ish. I should be returning to uni in late September/early October (if I pass!). So your originally from India? Whereabouts? I have family in India, their scattered everywhere in fact. What do you plan to study when you get back? With your dad dabbling in business you must travel a lot then? I'd love to go Melbourne. I've only seen views of the city in films namely: Salaam Namaste! Hope your well, and again congratulations :-) -- Pa7 17:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for the kind words! Yes, I live in London. I've been to India many times. My family mostly live in Mumbai but I have family in Goa, Surat and Kolkata. I haven't been to the latter though. I love the weddings in India, over here in the UK, the weddings are boring! I wanna go during Holi and Diwali. I wanna travel around India soon, just go everywhere. I've always wanted to go to Kerala, the climate and greenary looks spectacular. Did you just stay in Melbourne or did you travel around Aussie land? -- Pa7 19:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another sexy brunette in a lovely green dress. Such a shame it will have to be deleted. Why do these people upload images and claim to have taken them! Have a look at the gallery of her at myspace. OMG !!

Hello. Oh yes I know about that. I wonder how implausible it would be that Preity Zinta has visited wikipedia too. Surely she must have seen wikipedia some time or other!! Hey great news Shahid, the bot I requested to be set up has been approved Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FritzpollBot. This means a potential 1.8 million articles will be added to wikipedia in the next few montsh and get all place son a google map onto wikipedia. Great news isn't it!! I hope you don't have to leave any time real soon, I know you said something about having to leave. I would miss having your friendship for sure.

Oh guys c'mon! That woman has had too much plastic surgery!! LOL! Yeh, I think I would consider myself an NRI, after all I was born in the UK. Obviously, the fact that I am a NRI, did not make me feel better when I saw Swades. I didn't know Melbourne had a Indian population. I though most of the Indians were around Sydney... hmmm, interesting. I'm currently in the middle of exams, then I'm free by July, then back at uni for September, so I should be done properly by next April/May. Time fly's though, it should go quickly. -- Pa7 16:26, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well done about the article. Poor old PZ crying on Saturday night after that headless performance against CSK. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Oh don't remind me that :) - after several consecutive wins, they sign the IPL with such a defeat. But I don't really understand anything here... Is there a final winner now? Anyway, I'd rather think of her upcoming films, which I'm looking forward to. She has moved to art cinema, and has worked with directors like Rituparno Ghosh and Deepa Mehta (have you heard of them?), which is much more important to me and to PZ herself. Thanks again, Blnguyen. Shahid • ^Talk2me 11:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, no I hadn't heard of any of those things. Shane Warne and Rajasthan won. It would have been funnier if SRK and PZ acted as 12th man. I wonder if there is a rule against having females in a male team? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am a master student at the Institute of Technology Management, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan. Currently I am wrapping up my master thesis titled “Can Wikipedia be used for knowledge service?” In order to validate the knowledge evolution maps of identified users in Wikipedia, I need your help. I have generated a knowledge evolution map to denote your knowledge activities in Wikipedia according to your inputs including the creation and modification of contents in Wikipedia, and I need you to validate whether the generated knowledge evolution map matches the knowledge that you perceive you own it. Could you please do me a favor?

1. I will send you a URL link to a webpage on which your knowledge evolution map displays. Please assign the topic (concept) in the map to a certain cluster on the map according to the relationship between the topic and clusters in your cognition, or you can assign it to ‘none of above’ if there is no suitable cluster.
2. I will also send a questionnaire to you. The questions are related to my research topic, and I need your viewpoints about these questions.

The deadline of my thesis defense is set by the end of June, 2008. There is no much time left for me to wrap up the thesis. If you can help me, please reply this message. I will send you the URL link of the first part once I receive your response. The completion of my thesis heavily relies much on your generous help.

Sincerely

JnW^talk 07:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear from you and I appreciate your insights. I do agree with you about Filmfare and National Film Awards being the best known and oldest awards. Before reverting my edits, however, I wonder if I could try and make an argument for IIFA? Of course, consensus rules here, but I would like to share my thoughts on this. Let me know what you think. -Classicfilms (talk) 17:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, let me congratulate you for helping to bring

List of Lage Raho Munna Bhai awards

?

As for award ceremonies in India, I have been thinking about this for awhile, particularly since there are so many of them. You make many fair arguments above and I think most would agree that the National Film Awards and Filmfare are the oldest.

However, Wikipedia:Notability (films) guidelines moves these arguments beyond what is generally known about these two awards - that they are the oldest. The guidelines:

A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Thus, the National Film Awards would not fit because they receive very little coverage in India and abroad relative to Filmfare and the others. As for the other ceremonies, of course they all receive a great deal of coverage in South Asia. However, international coverage is limited (unless it is the press of the country in which the ceremony is taking place). In contrast, however, I have been impressed over the past few years with the level of international coverage received by the IIFA (regardless of where the ceremony is taking place). For example:

The BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/1915331.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_yorkshire/6506355.stm

The

Hollywood Reporter

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/asia/thailand/e3i0c79027147aedf759968bdece3cde47c

Variety

http://www.variety.com/awardcentral_article/VR1117985065.html?nav=news&categoryid=1983&cs=1

The

Times Online

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/bollywood/article4098331.ece

The Wikipedia is an international, rather than national project and thus the level of international coverage is an issue for notability. As far as I know, none of the other ceremonies receive this kind of international coverage and thus this creates an argument of notability for the IIFA.

-Classicfilms (talk) 17:59, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, here's another question for you then. According to this table, NFA -> Filmfare -> Star Screen -> Stardust/IIFA/Zee Cine/Bollywood Movie Awards - how is the choice of Filmfare justified as that is what most of the existing tables record? By this chart, the only tables should be NFA. What has been the logic for listing the Filmfare tables which complies with NPOV? -Classicfilms (talk) 18:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, why would you think that? You made very valid arguments and convinced me so I thought I would remove the tables. Wait until I do that and then I have another question for you. Realize that when I added these tables, I was not aware of the ongoing discussions - you explained them very well. I'll be back in a few moments. -Classicfilms (talk) 19:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New question

Ok, I've removed all of the tables. As I just wrote, you made a valid case for the current limitation. Now I have a new question. Currently the only table is "Filmfare" - best film. As you know, there are two categories - "Filmfare" - best film and "Filmfare" Critics choice best film. I am wondering how it is not POV to limit this table to only the best film category and not the critics choice one? Thanks, -Classicfilms (talk) 19:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip about where the discussions began. In the future, if I make edits to film articles that go against a discussion such as this one, could you clue me in first? It's so hard to keep track of all the decisions made in the WP. I do think that if POV is a concern, then both "Best Film" and "Critics Best Film" should be included - to pick one and not the other is POV. I don't want to give you more work - I'll just go ahead and add the tables. I'll put a note on your page to let you know when they are finished. Thanks for your help :-) - Classicfilms (talk) 19:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've added tables for

Sure, I like all kinds of films. -Classicfilms (talk) 23:59, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL what?? Oh sorry I've been away I'm managed to stop sneezing this afternoon enough to edit! Feels like I've been away ages. My editing will still be infrequent over the week or two. How are you?